Evacuation Plan for High Rise Buildings - Case Study Example

Evacuation Plan for High Rise Buildings Name Professor Date Abstract One major nightmare for developed countries like the USA, China and Britain is dealing with emergencies like fire from high-rise buildings. At one point, a very big inferno was once witnessed in the Shanghai town in China that claimed lives; the same was a nightmare to USA when two of its important and historic buildings were brought down through a suicide attack using airlines; the MGM hotel went on fire and the Lakalan House was seen in flames and even a renowned designer Catherine died in it. There is a call for efficient evacuation plans that will help reach every occupant in a high-rise building and help save lives. It is because such a challenge that this paper aims to study evacuation in high-rise buildings with respect to exploring the current evacuation procedures in such buildings. This will go further to investigate the effects of poor evacuation procedures and recommend the right procedures that should be followed in the evacuation of individuals in a safe manner in the event of fire, risks of bombs among other emergencies. In order to further identify the probable improvements to life safety, this paper will further look at case studies of certain apartments like Shanghai apartment fire, mgm grand hotel fire Las Vegas among fire at Lakanal House in London's Camberwell among others. This would also involve a comparison of these case studies. Such a study has been inspired by the need to have an evacuation plan for high-rise buildings with the capability of tracking every occupant individually from the building (Fahy, 332). Evacuation Plan for High Rise Buildings Introduction Evacuation is the protective measure taken during disasters such as hurricanes, floods, landslides, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and high-rise building fires and explosion (NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code, 2012). Drawing a population from a threat zone has remained a challenge for most people and governments. Every government tries to ensure that it has a good emergency management strategy. With specific reference to high-rise buildings, evacuation of people from such buildings remains a challenge. This is because high-rise buildings require a good number of people to travel the vertical distances on stairs in order to evacuate the building. The physical demands at times in the process become too much for the occupants as they go beyond their capabilities. The National Fire Protection Association defines high-rise buildings as one, which is 75 feet tall when measured from the lowest level of fire department vehicles to the floor of the highest occupied story (OSHA, 2003). One characteristic of such buildings is that they have life systems installed in them like automatic fire sprinkler protection (NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code, 2012). They are at most times used to control fire and therefore make the process of evacuation simpler, but the challenges posses when the fire exceeds their capacity. At times, it becomes worse when it starts on the middle floors. To counteract this challenge it would be recommendable to discuss the evacuation strategies by first having a look at a few case studies. Case Study 1: Shanghai Apartment Fire China is an example of a country with many high-rise buildings. In the study of evacuation plan for such high-rise buildings, the Shangai Apartment Fire cannot be passed. The building is located at the intersection of Jiaozhou Road and Yuyao road in Shanghai’s Jingan district and was first constructed in 1997. By the time the fire on a Shangai apartment in China happened on 15th November 2010, the building was under construction. The building was a 28 story high rise building in the city. Residents reported of seeing smoke several kilometres away from the scene showing that the fire was big. The building was reported to be housing 440 people who mostly retired teachers. Over 60% of the causalities were above the age of 50. Investigations by the Chinese police reported that sparks of fire from a welding work being done on the building by unlicensed welders caused the fire. The flames were reported to have quickly spread to the building and workers could be seen son the scaffoldings, others climbing to the roof in a bid to escape from the fire. Precisely and concisely, the fire was speculated to have been caused by an ignition of polyurethane foam insulation used on the building’s outer walls. The blame for the fire was put on the negligence of unlicensed welders on the tenth floor. In a bid to rescue the people in the building, over 50 people unfortunately died, as they were unable to escape the fire, which took the four hours to contain. The unlicensed welders were later arrested as the government took the responsibility of compensating the fire victims. The government went further to start an overhaul of fire-control measures in the country. Other than just the unlicensed welders being arrested, the municipal government also detained a number of managers from several construction companies and this was followed by passing strict legislation on the construction industry. Once the fire was noticed, the rescue mission began. Over 80 fire tracks were taken to the place to fight the blaze (CBC News, Nov 2010). The building was already gutted by the time they arrived. After a battle for six hours, the fire fighters managed to put out the fire. Bodies were then being removed from the building. Photograph taken of the scene showed men clinging on the scaffolding, trying to escape the fire. Fire fighters were reported to have rescued certain families who had sensed the fire early enough. The fire department at one point used the helicopters and at least a few individuals were reported to have been rescued. The rescue mission was later hampered by thick smoke from the building and so they could no longer be sued. Reportedly, one survivor gave a story of how she had managed to escape the fire. She said the crews were installing energy-saving gadgets when the fire occurred; she filled with thick smoke that made it difficult for her to breath. She called the cities emergency hot line and used a wet towel to cover her mouth and nose as she ran down a fire escape (CBC News, Nov 2010). Case Study 2: Mgm Grand Hotel Fire Las Vegas In the history of the United States, MGM Grand Hotel fire left a record that had never been witnessed. The fire occurred on November 21, 1980 killing 85 people and leaving over 700 people severely injured (US fire Department, 2012). The fire originated from an electrical ground fault inside a wall soffit. A vibration of a refrigerator that was powered from the wall, made the wires to rub against each other. The friction exposed their nakedness and thus caught fire. The majority of the deaths were caused by the toxic fumes of the burning materials (NFPA Report, 2012). It was determined that although majority of the deaths were caused by the wall soffit, the investigators concluded that so many factors could have led to the fire, which is secondary sources (NFPA Report, 2012). An employee who had observed a flickering light later discovered that the flame was travelling from the countertop to the ceiling. He notified the security personnel in the hotel and went further to get a hose line and fire extinguisher (NFPA Report, 2012). He tried several times to put out the fire but was brought down by the heat, smoke and pressure that had built up. This was done by other employees as well who had also noticed the fire but all was in vain. The fire spread so fast that within less than 10 minutes from the time the fire was discovered, it had reached the casino area (NFPA report, 2012). The Clark County Fire received a call and arrived at the scene after approximately two minutes after the call. The fire engine was positioned at the North Entrance and started the rescue mission. The crew observed black smoke coming from the Deli when they first went in; they had not gone in so much when a fireball burst from the Deli and rolled into the Casino and this forced them out of the place (NFPA report, 2012). Using fire engines, they started fighting the fire. Case Study 3: Fire at Lakanal House in London's Camberwell Lakanal House is a 14-storey tower block, which forms part of the Sceaux Gardens Estate in Camberwell. It has 98 flats. On 3 July 2009, there was fire outbreak on one of the flats of Lakanal House. The London Fire brigade responded fast by arriving at the scene with eighteen fire engines. A number of people were rescued from the flats. The fire had started at the ninth floor. Unfortunately, there were no communal fire alarms in the building so that the fire department and occupants could know about the fire. The fire brigade arrived nine minutes later after the start of the fire and started tackling the fire. By the time they were arriving, the fire had already spread to the 11th floor. The smoke form the building killed one designer. The building had a central staircase only to be used for exiting the building but the staircase was already filled with black smoke. An operational command centre was put on the seventh floor. Many residents called 999 to report that they were caught up in the fire. The fire was reported to have been spread most by molten material that fell from above and ignited the curtain; the building had flammable uPVC frames. Although most of the floors were not immediately affected, smoke was all over. As the fire continued to spread, the operational command centre was relocated to third floor. This called for the dispatch of nine special fire rescue units totalling to 18 fire engines; more than 100 fire fighters also took part in the battle with the inferno. The fire went on for more than two hours as the fire fighters with the extension of engine ladders fought the fire, although there was a complain that the ladders were not long enough to reach some floors. The fire crews also went floor to floor upwards ensuring that every flat was safe; in the course; more than 40 residents were rescued. At one pint, there was fear that large gas pipes had exploded from inside the building and fire fighters were barred from reaching the floors above 11th floor. Reports show that the Southwark council had news on the building being at a risk of catching fire anytime, but they dint act nor did they carry out any risk assessments (BBC News, May 2012). Once this was established upon investigations, the prosecutors so no need fro a conviction. This was also with the view that there was insufficient evidence to prove any allegations. The financial cost for the authority after the fire has been so high but no death compensations were reported especially for the designer Catherine Hickman (BBC News, May 2012). Unfortunately was inquest was done on the over 100 families that were made homeless. The BBC later discovered that there was a parliamentary investigation report on the buildings of Southwark, which showed that the buildings were at fire risk because they had certain elements of construction that could pose a fire risk (BBC News, May 2012). Once this was realized, all authorities were ordered to publish safety measures especially on the risk of fire. Case Study 4: 9/11. On September 11, 2001, America was under attack. 19 militiamen associated with Al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners and carried out suicide attacks against USA. Tow planes were rammed into World Trade Centre building in New York and the third one into Pentagon (A&E Television Networks, 2012). This caused extensive death and destruction making US to start its intensive plan of combating terrorism in the world. Over 3000 people died including over 400 police officers and fire fighters (A&E Television Networks, 2012). The jets were fully fuelled. Once they rammed into the building, a gaping hole was created in the 80th floor of the 110-story skyscraper. So many people were thus killed and others trapped in the higher floors. Evacuation procedures started immediately, but several other attacks were witnessed. Just 18 minutes after the first attack, another airline sharply turned into the World Trade Centre and sliced the 60th floor. The collision caused fire all over up to the streets. The worst happened 15 minutes later when the south tower of the World Trade Centre collapsed in a massive cloud of dust and smoke. Even though the building was structured in such a way that it could withstand winds and large conventional fires, it could not manage to withstand the fire that came from the jet fuel. Later the other Trade Centre tower collapsed. 343 fire fighters and paramedics, 23 New York City Police officers and 37 Port Authority police officers who were helping in the evacuation process died when the building collapsed (A&E Television Networks, 2012). Over 10,000 were treated of severe injuries. A Comparison of the Case Studies One major characteristic of all these case studies is that all of them involved fire emergency. In China, it was fire from the welding materials; London it was on the ninth floor, although the cause was not clearly established; 9/11 was an airline crash on towers and gasoline exploding to create large infernos; and still in America, MGM hotel fire. Most of the fires in these case studies started at the floors a bit higher from the floor. On the aspect of response to disaster, all the fire departments involved in the rescue mission responded in time, with heavy machinery. For example, Shanghai fire apartment had 80 fire engines while the Lakanal House had almost 100 fire fire fighters. Some arrived very fast as soon as they got the news of fire; for example, the MGM Hotel response was within less than 5minutes while the Lakalan House was 9 minutes. It showed how the countries were prepared with risk management gadgets as US personnel responded so fast. On the concept of communication, the US used their televisions, alarm response and all the media to inform especially at the first attack. Even though the employees and workers were slow to communicate. It was well reported that occupants of the Lakalan house were making calls to 999 telling the police that they are trapped; the MGM Hotel employee informed the security personnel very fast who quickly informed the Fire Brigade. It is in Chinese case study that the workers were blamed for their sluggishness in dealing with the fire. The employee at the MGM Hotel is seen taking a hosepipe and a fire extinguisher to put out the fire, an attempt that is most appropriate. One problem that all these case studies showed was the construction materials that were being used, which could easily catch fire. The Shanghai apartment and the Lakalan house are reported not to have any fire safety gadgets to help put out the fire when it starts. The Lakalan House for example never even had any other exit way except the central staircase. All the case studies had authorities responsible for ensuring all safety measures are put in place. At least, in some case studies like the Shanghai had compensation schemes. In general, all these case studies show certain measures that have been put in place to help in the evacuation of occupants from a building. Alarm response is a major characteristic followed by use of fire engines and even helicopters to some extent. The occupants of such buildings still need to be educated on rescue strategies in cases of fire. The effect of poor evacuation plans has been brought out as well in these case studies. For example, when occupants move to the upper floors, it is not a good strategy as they are not sure of being rescued. For example, in the Chinese apartment fire, the helicopter was reported to have only rescued one person and never went further because of the thick smoke that could easily bring the helicopter down. The rescue in the higher floors caused the death of all officers in the rescue mission, when the towers of Worlds Trade centre collapsed. Poor evacuation plan, therefore, would lead to massive loss of life, destruction of property and even wastage of resources for the fire brigade. Thus, there is a need for well-guided policy on the evacuation plan for high-rise buildings. Recommendation for the Right Procedures for Evacuation As discussed above a high-rise building is 75 feet tall plus. Such buildings are required to have alarms, emergency lighting, communication systems and sprinkler systems, which are all critical for employee safety (OSHA, 2003). The designs of exits in such buildings normally ensure easy access for effective evacuation during emergencies. Evacuating occupants of such buildings as said before is a major challenge, but all the same, some measures must always be put in place. Considering that, the high-rise buildings are so hectic when evacuation is being done due to their staircases and tallness, one key element of emergencies preparedness should be to give an early warning like an alarm or voice communication system, have exit routes and ensure that every occupant is familiar with the exit plan (NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code, 2012). The NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code therefore requires that every workplace, health facilities and institutions provide evacuation/relocation plan information on routine basis (2012). The procedure of how the emergency instructions reach the occupants of a building a question here is as well. Therefore, the NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code recommends that fire alarm systems should have a voice communication system as well. This will enable the emergency personnel to broadcast measures that the occupants need to take in case an emergency occurs. For example, the occupants who are in greatest potential danger can be told to use the exit stairs while those on other floors to stay where they are and await further instructions. If the staircase travel is potentially dangerous, other alternatives can be employed. The use of the fire protection and life safety systems would be appropriate to help the occupants to move to a floor slightly below the fire flow. In this place, they would await further instructions. As seen in the apartment in Shanghai, it would not be advisable for occupants to go up to the top if the staircase evacuation takes long. It will be a dangerous thing for all that are involved in the rescue mission. This is because; a helicopter may not come to rescue you, because large thermal currents can cause the helicopters to be buffeted up or down, making it hard to control. One thing that should be put obvious is that most high rise buildings are designed with features that direct occupants to the streets for evacuation purposes (NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code, 2012). The use of elevators should be discouraged as they may travel to the fire floor itself thus exposing occupants to the fire. They might also harbour some smoke and chock the occupants in the building using it. Another element that should not be forgotten is that the human population in these buildings is also characterized by people with disabilities especially the visually impaired and the ones on wheel chairs. The procedures for evacuating such people should be put in writing. Normally, the building should provide areas with spaces where such people would wait until the fire department personnel can remove them. At times the fire becomes too much and a person is trapped inside. In this case, it is good to relocate position and if possible, go to room a close the door and seal any cracks to block smoke from coming in. advisably, it would be good to then make a call to the fire engine department and report your exact location in the building. You can also signal the rescue personnel from a window using light-colored clothes, but not break the window or jump. This calls for most buildings not to exhibit exterior escape device such as chutes because they do not help to provide escape routes in towers and in manufacturing environments. Conclusion A study of the evacuation strategies of the above case studies show that certain delays in the way everyone responds to fire emergencies can cause great problems like massive loss of death. Uneducated occupants of a high-rise building can make the evacuation process very hectic especially when they are not aware of what to do during the evacuation process. In addition, this is why occupants are always required to take certain measures in the event of an emergency occurring. For example, in the event of fire in a high-rise building, no one should lock any fire exit; these include doors, staircases and halls. Normally, a regular check up is recommended for all back-up and safety systems in the building followed by a work-plan evacuation plan posted on every floor (OSHA, 2003). All the personnel in charge of the alarms should be well trained on how to deal with such situations by conducting regular evacuation drills. With such measures in place, together with the fire engines, the evacuation process from high-rise buildings can be effective. References A&E Television Networks, LLC. (2012). 9/11 Attacks. (Online). Available from (Accessed 1st October, 2012). Best, Richard. (1980). Investigation Report on the MGM Grand Hotel Fire, Las Vegas Nevada. National Fire Protection Association. LasVegasMGMGrand.pdf. CBC News World. (November 15, 2010). Shanghai Apartment Fire Kills 42: Associated press. (Online). Available from (Accessed 31st October 2012). Davey, Ed. (31st May 2012). Lakanal House Fire: No Manslaughter Charge for SouthWark Council. BBC News London. (Online) Available from (Accessed 31st October 2012). Fahy, Rita. (1995). An Evacuation Model for High Rise Buildings: Fire Research and Analysis Division, National Fire Protection Association; Massachusetts, USA. Klingsch et. Al. (2010). Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics 2008. Springer National Fire Protection Association. (2012). Faqs about Building Evacuation. (Online) Available from (Accessed 31st October, 2012) NFPA Report. (2012). Clark County Fire Department Report/Summary: 30 Years-Ago: Mgm Grand Fire in Las Vegas Kills 85 People & Injures 700.(Online) Available from (Accessed 31st October, 2012). OSHA Fact Sheet. (2003). Evacuating High Rise Buildings. Evacuating FSpmd; US Department of Labour US Fire Department. (8/1/2011). The MGM Grand Fire. (Online) Available from (Accessed 31st October, 2012). Read More